Avocado variety named &#39;Uzi&#39;

ABSTRACT

A new and distinct  Persea americana  variety having strong tolerance to  Phytophthora cinnamomi  when used as a rootstock. It is an extremely vigorous and fast-growing rootstock that is capable of supporting a ‘Hass’ tree growing to 15 ft. in 2 years. It&#39;s yields are generally high and consistent. ‘Uzi’ leaves exhibit burn due to salt damage, but this does not seem to affect the growth or yield of the ‘Hass’ variety.

LATIN NAME OF THE GENUS AND SPECIES

The avocado cultivar of this invention is botanically identified asPersea Americana Mill.

VARIETY DENOMINATION

The variety denomination is ‘Uzi’.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Avocado root rot is the limiting factor for the growth of avocadosthroughout the world. Avocado root rot is caused by the fungusPhytophthora cinnamomi, which attacks and kills the feeder roots ofavocado trees. The resultant lack of roots causes the tree to eventuallydie from water stress. There are a number of varieties of rootstocksthat have some tolerance to the disease. These varieties included ‘Duke7’ (unpatented), the most commonly planted tolerant rootstock in theworld; and ‘Thomas’ (U.S. Plant Pat. No. 6,628), another root rottolerant rootstock. However, even with these rootstocks, growers muststill use a variety of methods, including mounding, mulching and theapplications of chemical fungicides, to keep the tress from dying inmany soils. More resistant rootstocks are necessary to eliminate avocadoroot rot as a major disease threat.

Screening and Greenhouse Evaluation of Rootstocks

‘Uzi’ was identified and characterized using the following screeningprotocol. As it is difficult to breed avocados because only one inapproximately one thousand flowers actually set fruit, plant breedingblocks of avocados were isolated to prevent out-crossing withsusceptible rootstocks. The breeding blocks were made up of variouscombinations of selected rootstocks including, ‘Thomas’ (U.S. Plant Pat.No. 6,628), ‘Barr Duke’ (U.S. Plant Pat. No. 6,627), ‘G6’, ‘Duke 7’,‘Duke 9’, ‘UC 2001’, ‘UC 2011’, ‘Toro Canyon’ (U.S. Plant Pat. No.5,642), ‘Spencer’, ‘CR1-71’, ‘G 810’, ‘G 875’, ‘G 755A’, ‘VC 256’, and‘Steyemarkii’. In order to synchronize blooming, attempts were made togirdle late-blooming varieties and spray early-blooming varieties withthe pesticide Unicona-zole-P.

Initial screening was carried out by germinating seeds, which wereharvested from the breeding blocks, in flats of vermiculite in thegreenhouse. Phytophthora cinnamomi-infested millet was placed in rowsalong with the young roots of the test seedlings. After 8-10 weeks rootswere evaluated and those with a high percentage of surviving roots weretransplanted to soil mix incorporated with P. cinnamomi-infested millet.Rootstocks that survived this test were planted and grown in P.cinnamomi-infested soils. Survivors were examined more carefully forvarious types of resistance using clonally propagated material.

a. Root survival—Rootstocks were grown in typical California avocadosoils, inoculated with P. cinnamomi and evaluated for growth, rootlength and percent healthy roots.

b. Root regeneration—Rootstocks were grown in soil inoculated with P.cinnamomi, treated with Aliette to halt Phytophthora root rot andevaluated for root regeneration.

c. Attraction to P. cinnamomi—Roots of the rootstocks were placed inwater baths with motile zoospores of P. cinnamomi. The numbers of sporesattracted to the roots were evaluated.

Rootstocks that performed well in the screening and greenhouseevaluations were further tested under field conditions.

Selection of ‘Uzi’

‘Uzi’ was developed at Riverside, Calif. The maternal parent is ‘G6’(unpatented) avocado variety. The pollen parent is unknown.Specifically, the ‘Uzi’ rootstock variety was selected in 1993 from anagricultural operations land located Riverside, Calif. The fruit werecollected from the avocado breeding blocks, the seed removed, andplanted in vermiculite. The seeds were grown in a greenhouse. The plantswere inoculated with the fungus Phytophthora cinnamomi. After showingtolerance to the disease, ‘Uzi’ was chosen as a single plant for furthertesting. Budwood was collected from the plants and grafted to the stumpsof adult avocado trees that had been cut down at Irvine, Calif. The newvarieties grew into trees which provided budwood for further testing. Atleast two ‘mother’ trees of the variety are growing in Irvine, Calif.,along with the germplasm. During screening and evaluation, ‘Uzi’, whichwas selected and originally designated ‘PP14’, distinguished itself fromother varieties by having a high tolerance against Phytophthora rootrot. The properties of ‘Uzi’ were found to be true to type andtransmissible by asexual reproduction;

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to a new and distinct avocado variety. ‘Uzi’ isan avocado tree having a rootstock that has a high tolerance againstPhytophthora root rot. It is an extremely vigorous and fast-growingrootstock that is capable of supporting a ‘Hass’ tree growing to 15 ft.in 2 years. It's yields are generally high and consistent. The ‘Uzi’leaves exhibit burn due to salt damage, but this does not seem to affectthe growth or yield of the ‘Hass’ variety.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates a eight-year-old top-worked tree of the ‘Uzi’ varietywhile growing in Irvine, Calif.

FIG. 2 illustrates typical mature foliage of the ‘Uzi’ variety withdimensions in centimeters shown at the bottom.

FIG. 3 illustrates typical flush foliage of the ‘Uzi’ variety withdimensions in centimeters shown at the bottom.

FIG. 4A illustrates typical inflorescence with dimensions in centimetersshown at the right, and FIG. 4B illustrates typical inflorescence byitself.

FIG. 5 illustrates a typical external view of the fruit of the ‘Uzi’variety, with dimensions in centimeters shown at the bottom.

FIG. 6 illustrates typical internal views of the fruit of the ‘Uzi’variety, with and without the seed. Dimensions in centimeters are shownat the bottom.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The following is a detailed description of the new ‘Uzi’ variety, whichwas taken from an approximately eight-year-old mature tree, with theexception as a rootstock for a specific scion when reference is made toroot rot resistance and salinity tolerance. The tree is located in aexperimental orchard in Irvine, Calif. and is grafted on a Perseaamericana seedling used as a rootstock.

The Royal Horticulture Society (R.H.S.) color numbering system is usedherein for the color description of the rind, seed, bark, leaf, flower,flesh color and other interest of the ‘Uzi’ avocado tree.

-   Trees, foliage, and flowers:-   Tree:    -   -   Growth habit.—vigorous, upright and spreading when compared            to the root stock ‘Thomas’.        -   Vigor.—below are data on the vigor of ‘Hass’ grafted onto            the rootstock ‘Uzi’ ,as determined by trunk diameter            measurements from trees planted in an orchard with            Phytophthora cinnamomi in Escondido, Calif.

TABLE 1 Trunk diameter (cm) Rootstock year 1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5PP # 14 Uzi 2.85 5.14 8.57 10.6 12.54 Thomas 2.44 4.29 6.75  8.4010.84 * Malone ranch, Escondido Ca., with Hass scion

TABLE 2 Canopy volume (cubic feet) Rootstock year 1 year 2 year 3 year 4year 5 PP # 14 Uzi. 21.86 163.21 504.3 669 1338.2 Thomas 13.56 84.48388.5 367. 1076.2 *Malone ranch, Escondido Ca., with Hass scion

-   -   -   Size.—large. The typical canopy size of a three year old            top-worked ‘Thomas ’ is 388 cu.ft. By comparison the canopy            size of a three year old topworked ‘Uzi’ is 504 cu.ft.

-   Branch:    -   -   Color.—the color of the one year old branch is green (RHS            146C).        -   Smoothness.—the bark of a one year old branch is smooth.        -   Lenticels.—the lenticles of a one year old branch are            conspicuous.

-   Main stem:    -   -   Color.—brown (RHS N 200C and N 200D).        -   Texture of bark.—corky.

-   Young shoot (flush):    -   -   Intensity of anthocyanin coloration.—weak.        -   Color.—grayed-orange (RHS 165B).        -   Conspicuousness of lenticles.—medium.        -   Color of lenticels.—grayed-purple (RHS 185A).        -   Size of lenticels.—1.0-3.0 mm long.        -   Concentration of lenticels.—+/−25 lenticels per square cm.        -   Color of upper side.—grayed-green (RHS 194B).        -   Glossiness of upper side.—medium.        -   Color of lower surface.—grayed-green (RHS 193B).

-   Mature leaf:    -   -   Length.—13.0 cm.        -   Width.—5.5 cm.        -   Ratio length/width.—2.4.        -   Shape.—elliptical.        -   Color of upper side.—green (RHS 139A).        -   Color of lower side.—green (RHS 137B).        -   Glossiness of upper side.—medium-high.        -   Prominence of veins on lower side.—prominent and in relief.        -   Color of veins.—yellow-green (RHS 145A).        -   General shape and cross-section.—flat, slightly concave.        -   Reflexing of apex.—absent.        -   Color of petiole.—yellow-green (RHS 144A).        -   Anise aroma.—present.        -   Margin.—leaf margin is very weak.        -   Leaf apex shape.—acute.        -   Leaf base shape.—elliptical.        -   Length of leaf petiole.—approximately 2.8 cm.        -   Leaf arrangement.—upright.

-   Flower:    -   -   Bud size.—approximately 3 mm in length and approximately 2.5            mm in diameter.        -   Bud shape.—ovoid.        -   Bud color.—grayed-green (RHS 197C).        -   Opening.—belongs to group “B”, female opening (i.e. with            mature pistil) occurs in the afternoon, the flower closes            over night, and the male opening (i.e. with mature stamens)            occurs the next morning; the flower's opening cycle lasts            20-24 hours.        -   Petals.—borne in two whorls of three perianth lobes. The            petals possess entire margins and petal coloration is near            yellow-green (RHS 151D).        -   Stamen.—there are commonly are nine fertile stamens with            each having two basal orange nectar glands and three            stainodia. The anthers are tetrathecal.        -   Pistil.—the single pistil with a slender style and small            stigmatic surface has one carpel with one ovule. The ovary            is superior.        -   Pedicel.—commonly approximately 6 mm in length and            approximately 2.0 mm in diameter. The coloration is near            yellow-green (RHS 151B).        -   Number of flowers on inflorescence.—approximately 108-135            flowers per inflorescence.        -   Fragrance.—absent.        -   Bloom.—bloom period at Riverside, Calif. experiment station            varies with cultural conditions. On average ‘Uzi’ has been            found to bloom from 25^(th) of January through the 15^(th)            of March.

-   Fruit, fruit and production characteristics:

-   Fruit:    -   -   Length.13 7.0 cm.        -   Width.—5.5 cm.        -   Ratio length/width.—1.3.        -   Shape.—oblong.        -   Color of skin (when ripe).—grayed-purple (RHS N186).        -   Texture of skin.—smooth.        -   Presence of longitudinal ridges.—absent.        -   Thickness of skin.—thin.        -   Adherence of skin to flesh.—weak.        -   Main color of flesh.—yellow-green (RHS 144B).        -   Color of intensely colored area of flesh next to            skin.—yellow-green (RHS 144A).        -   Width of intensely colored area next to skin.—1.0 mm.        -   Conspicuousness of fibers in flesh.—conspicuous.

-   Seed:    -   -   Length.—4.7 cm.        -   Width.—4.0 cm.        -   Shape (in longitudinal section).—circular.        -   Shape (in cross section).—circular.        -   Color of seed coat (fresh).—grayed-orange (RHS 177A).        -   Time of harvesting.—‘Uzi’ fruit ripen in September/October            (in Riverside Calif.).        -   Resistance to pests.—Strong resistance to Phytophthora            cinnamomi.        -   Tolerance to salinity.—medium.        -   Market use.—the fruit of ‘Uzi’ are not intended for market            use, but rather the variety is used as a rootstock onto            which commercial varieties, such as ‘Hass’ are grafted.

TABLE 3 Rootstock rating at San Ron Ranch, Santana, Ventura County,August 2001¹ Tree rating Canopy Trunk No. trees Rootstock (0-5; 5 =dead) volume (cu ft) diameter (cm) dead Steddom 0.80 a 13.89 a 1.92 a 1Merensky II 0.90 a 15.10 a 1.48 a 1 Uzi 0.90 a 16.92 a 2.02 a 0 Zentmyer1.05 a 16.48 a 2.05 a 1 G755A 1.65 a  5.55 a 1.62 a 1 (Brokaw) Medina1.90 a 12.66 a 1.70 a 2 Berg 2.20 a 13.80 a 1.29 a 4 McKee 2.35 a  9.05a 1.52 a 1 Duke 7 2.50 a 11.40 a 1.24 a 4 Thomas 2.65 a 10.22 a 1.15 a 4G755 A (C&M) 2.75 a 11.66 a 1.49 a 2 UC 2023 3.00 a  6.21 a 1.25 a 3¹Mean values in each column followed by identical letters are notstatistically different according to Waller's k-ratio t test.

TABLE 4 Rootstock rating at San Ron Ranch, Santana, Ventura County,November 2002. Two-year trial to-date. Tree rating Canopy Trunk Fruitrating Tip bum Canker (0-5; volume diameter (0-5; rating rating No.trees Rootstock 5 = dead) (cu ft) (cm) 5 = heavy) (0-5) (0-5) deadMerensky II 0.17 d 72.27 abc 3.49 ab 0.78 bcd 0.00 a 0.33 a 0/9 Uzi 0.50cd 69.64 abcd 3.64 a 2.50 a 0.33 a 0.00 a 1/10 Steddom 1.00 bcd 67.95abcd 2.94 abc 1.70 abc 0.25 a 0.00 a 2/10 Medina 1.06 bcd 79.89 ab 3.26ab 0.00 d 0.75 a 0.00 a 1/9 Zentmyer 1.50 bcd 81.44 a 3.19 ab 0.60 bcd0.38 a 0.63 a 1/10 Duke 7 1.67 bcd 32.48 abcde 2.31 abcd 1.11 abcd 0.38a 0.38 a 3/9 Berg 1.72 bcd 46.57 abcde 2.21 abcd 2.00 ab 0.17 a 0.83 a3/9 McKee 1.78 abcd 30.92 bcde 2.24 abcd 0.22 cd 0.43 a 0.29 a 2/10G755A (Brokaw) 2.30 abcd 19.98 de 1.90 bcd 0.10 d 0.29 a 0.14 a 3/10Thomas 2.60 abc 31.50 bcde 2.02 abcd 0.30 cd 0.17 a 1.00 a 4/10 UC 20232.95 ab 25.50 cde 1.41 cd 0.20 d 0.00 a 0.00 a 5/10 G755A (C&M) 4.00 a15.71 e 0.82 d 0.00 d. — — 8/10

TABLE 5 Rootstock ratings of avocado trees planted in root rot soil atMalone Ranch Plot 1, Escondido, July 2002 Canopy Trunk Fruit set Treerating volume diameter rating Tip Burn Cankers Dead Rootstocks 0-5; 5 =dead Cu ft Cm 0-5; 5 = heavy Number trees affected Zentmyer 0.00 c 397.4abc 7.12 bcd 1.53 cd 0 0  0/15 Rio Frio 0.00 c 313.5 cdef 6.33 cdef 2.13bcd 0 0  0/16 Merens I 0.00 c 543.6 a 8.74 a 3.50 a 0 0  0/14 Merensk II0.02 c 409.0 abc 7.81 abc 2.84 ab 0 1  0/17 VC 241 0.06 c 238.4 defg6.19 defg 1.41 cd 0 0  0/16 Uzi 0.29 bc 504.3 ab 8.57 ab 2.76 ab 2 0 1/17 Steddom 0.36 bc 376.1 bcde 7.07 bcd 2.43 bc 0 0  1/14 Thomas 0.44bc 388.5 bcd 6.75 cde 1.12 de 0 0  1/17 Guillemet 0.59 bc 192.0 fgh 4.90fgh 1.12 de 3 1  2/17 Spencer sdlg 0.63 bc 225.8 efg 5.24 efgh 1.56 cd 00  2/16 Leo 0.67 bc 288.2 cdef 5.89 defgh 1.60 cd 0 0  2/15 Spencerclonal 0.69 bc 163.8 fgh 4.65 gh 1.54 cd 0 0  5/16 Duke 7 1.00 b 129.3gh 4.38 h 1.47 cd 0 0  3/15 G755A 0.16 b 294.1 cdef 5.86 defgh 1.56 cd 21  3/16 PolyN 4.12 a  65.6 h 1.26 i 0.24 e 0 0 14/17

TABLE 6 Malone Field 1 rootstock trial tree ratio April 2003¹. Four-yeartrial to-date Tree Canker rating Canopy Trunk (0-5; Dead Root- (0-5; 5 =volume diam. 5 = Fruit trees stock dead) (cu ft) (cm) Salt heavy)rating² (%) MerenI 0.00d 551ab 10.7a 0.08cd   0a 2.97abc  0 VC241 0.06d281efgh  8.0abc 0.03cd   0a 3.41ab  0 Rio Frio 0.07d 362efcd  8.7abc0.00d   0a 3.73a  0 Zentmyer 0.07d 410bcde  9.2ab 0.32bc   0a 3.71a  0MerenII 0.18d 532abc  9.4ab 0.21dc 0.1a 2.97abc  0 Spen sdlg 0.36d263efgh  6.9bc 0.00d   0a 3.57ab  7 Uzi 0.38d 669a 10.6a 0.68a   0a3.47ab  6 Steddom 0.39d 478bcd  8.6abc 0.32bc   0a 3.75a  7 Thomas0.47cd 367cdef  8.4abc 0.62ab   0a 3.53ab  6 Leo 0.77cbd 274efgh  7.3abc0.13cd   0a 3.29ab 13 Guillemet 0.83cbd 190ghi  6.2bc 0.13cd   0a2.90abc 13 Duke7 1.34cb 127hi  8.8abc 0.16cd   0a 1.53de 19 Spen cl1.44b 211fghi  5.3c 0.12cd   0a 2.35bcd 23 G755A 1.69b 322defg  7.0bc0.25cd   0a 1.78cd 25 PolyN 4.15a  77i  1.5d 0.06cd   0a 0.29e 82 ¹Meanvalues in each column followed by identical letters are notstatistically different according to Waller's k-ratio t test. ²Fruit wasrated in November 2003.

TABLE 7 Malone Ranch Plot 1, Temecula, yield 2003 ^(1;2). Four yeartrial to-date. Fruit weight/ Number Fruit Rootstock tree (kg) fruit/treeweight (kg) Zentmyer 15.89a 68.64a 0.219a Uzi 13.99ab 59.24ab 0.195abSpencer seedling 12.52ab 56.27ab 0.181ab Merensky II 11.83ab 51.12ab0.185ab Rio Frio 10.87abc 51.33ab 0.187ab Steddom 10.01abc 46.20abc0.175abc Thomas  8.50abcd 40.12abcd 0.154abc G755A  8.08abcd 34.56abcd0.116bc VC241  7.44bcd 31.75bcd 0.202ab Guillemet  7.42bcd 30.00bcd0.196ab Spencer clonal  6.99bcd 32.00bcd 0.136abc Merensky I  6.95bcd32.08bcd 0.148abc Leo  6.53bcd 28.14bcd 0.140abc Duke 7  3.33cd 14.81cd0.138abc PolyN  1.72d  5.71d 0.076c ¹Mean values in each column followedby identical letters are not statistically different according toWaller's k-ratio t test. ²Only fruit which were grade size were picked;remaining fruit on trees to be picked later.

TABLE 8 Malone II, Escondido, Tree ratings, July 2002 Tree rating CanopyTrunk No. (0-5; vol. diam trees No. trees No. trees Rootstock 5 = dead)(cu ft) (cm) Dead w/tip bum w/canker Uzi 0.039 b 34.69 a 2.43 a 0 6 0Guillemet 0.042 b 22.86 a 2.06 a 0 4 0 Zentmyer 0.077 b 22.40 a 2.25 a 02 0 Spencer sdlg 0.536 b 27.81 a 2.01 a 0 2 1 Steddom 0.615 b 18.93 a1.99 a 1 0 0 Berg 0.714 b 21.42 a 1.98 a 0 1 2 Merensky II 0.750 b 32.07a 2.10 a 2 0 1 Elinor 0.786 b 29.44 a 2.03 a 1 0 2 Thomas 0.846 b 23.07a 1.85 a 1 2 0 Pond  1.00 ab 30.55 a 2.15 a 1 0 2 Crowley 1.083 ab 23.78a 1.86 a 2 1 0 G755A 1.231 ab 22.64 a 1.85 a 2 0 0 Duke 9 2.270 a  9.40a 1.07 b 5 0 0 There were significant differences at P = 0.01 betweenblocks for all tree parameters analyzed.

TABLE 9 Malone H, tree ratings, April 2003. Two-year trial to-date.Canopy Trunk Fruit rating Tree rating vol diam (0-5; 5 = Rootstock (0-5;5 = dead) (cu ft) (cm) heavy) Uzi 0.267 c 88.76 a 4.193 a 0.0 a Berg0.531 c 44.16 a 2.956 bc 0.0 a Zentmyer 0.600 c 54.37 a 3.393 ab 0.0 aMerensky II 0.833 bc 68.49 a 3.333 ab 0.0 a Steddom 0.867 bc 56.42 a3.127 ab 0.0 a Pond 0.906 bc 55.05 a 3.188 ab 0.0 a Spenser sdlg 0.906bc 51.45 a 2.988 bc 0.0 a Crowley 0.964 bc 42.05 a 3.021 bc 0.0 a Thomas1.071 bc 49.99 a 2.900 bc 0.0 a Guillemet 0.167 abc 43.64 a 2.960 bc 0.1a Elinor 1.393 abc 58.40 a 2.864 bc 0.0 a G755A 2.156 ab 44.21 a 2.819bc 0.0 a Duke 9 2.577 a 32.16 a 1.885 c 0.0 a Salt rating Canker ratingNo. trees Rootstock (0-5; 5 =severe) (0-5; 5 = severe) Dead (%) Uzi0.933 ab 0.000 a  0 Berg 0.633 abcd 0.000 a  6 Zentmyer 1.000 a 0.000 a 7 Merensky II 0.154 cd 0.308 a 13 Steddom 0.321 bcd 0.286 a  7 Pond0.767 abc 0.200 a  6 Spenser sdlg 0.300 bcd 0.200 a  6 Crowley 0.083 d0.000 a 14 Thomas 0.731 abc 0.000 a  0 Guillemet 0.615 abcd 0.133 a 13Elinor 0.333 bcd 0.167 a 14 G755A 0.846 ab 0.077 a 13 Duke 9 0.313 bcd0.500 a 38

TABLE 10 Weaver Ranch, Temecula rootstock ratings, Sept 2002 Tree FruitSalt rating rating damage Cankers (0-5; Canopy Trunk (0-5; (0-5; (0-5;No. 5 = vol. diam 5 = 5 = 5 = trees Rootstock dead) (cu ft) (cm) heavy)heavy) heavy) dead Zentmyer 0.400 c 40.70 ab 2.79 a 0.00 b 1.50 ab 0.00a 0/15 Crowley 0.618 c 40.38 ab 2.86 a 0.00 b 1.34 b 0.00 a 1/17 Elinor0.824 c 40.52 ab 2.54 a 0.00 b 1.59 ab 0.00 a 1/17 Guillemet 0.882 bc39.13 ab 2.42 a 0.00 b 1.41 b 0.00 a 2/17 Steddom 0.969 bc 29.20 bc 2.13ab 1.16 a 1.54 ab 0.50 a 2/16 Thomas 0.969 bc 31.46 bc 2.13 ab 0.00 b1.50 ab 0.00 a 3/16 Pond 1.088 bc 54.08 a 2.78 a 0.00 b 1.40 b 0.00 a2/17 Uzi 1.188 bc 35.08 ab 2.56 a 0.00 b 1.64 ab 0.00 a 2/16 G755A 2.088ab 37.85 ab 2.41 a 0.00 b 2.50 ab 0.36 a 4/17 Spencer sdlg 2.906 a 11.96c 1.39 b 0.00 b 2.63 a 0.00 a 4/16

TABLE 11 Weaver Ranch, Temecula, rootstock ratings, December 2003.Two-year trial to-date Canopy Trunk Fruit rating Tree rating vol diam(0-5; 5 = Rootstock (0-5; 5 = dead) (cu ft) (cm) heavy) Zentmyer 0.313c207.27a 6.23a 2.063a Pond 0.906c 307.04a 5.75a 1.813a Elinor 0.912c170.37a 4.80a. 1.059a Guillemet 1.059c 199.37a 5.73a 0.882a Uzi 1.094bc206.04a 4.35a 0.813a Crowley 1.250bc 144.14a 5.04a 1.438a Steddom1.281bc 254.94a 4.89a 1.188a Thomas 1.313be 226.39a 5.16a 1.375a G755A2.438ab 175.55a 5.23a 0.625a Spencer sdlg 2.813a  42.12a 2.26a 0.519aSalt damage Cankers Trees Rootstock (0-5; 5 = heavy) (0-5; 5 = heavy)dead (%) Zentmyer 1.188ab 0.000a  0 Pond 0.321cd 0.000a 13 Elinor0.469cd 0.000a  6 Guillemet 0.893abc 0.000a 18 Uzi 0.769abcd 0.000a 19Crowley 0.731abcd 0.000a 19 Steddom 0.167d 0.000a 25 Thomas 1.308a0.000a 19 G755A 1.167ab 0.000a 25 Spencer sdlg 0.500bcd 0.000a 44

What is claimed is:
 1. A new and distinct rootstock variety of avocadotree having the characteristics substantially as described andillustrated herein.